Mountain View: Council rejects appeal of cell antenna project

AT&T Mobility won't have to remove cellular coverage-boosting equipment from a utility pole a handful of Mountain View residents claim is ugly, unsafe and potentially noisy.

On Tuesday, the City Council rejected an appeal filed by Barbara Bernstein, Richard Schwachter and Anna Stepanov in response to a zoning administrator's recent decision to allow the company to place part of the equipment lower on the pole than was originally approved.

The "outdoor distributed antenna system" is one of a dozen AT&T received permission to install in 2012. Typically mounted on utility poles, the technology helps close gaps in cellular coverage.

Bernstein and Schwachter, residents of 2040 Jardin Drive, and Stepanov, a resident of 2028 Jardin Drive, said the company didn't do an adequate job of assessing alternative locations for the system that was placed on a pole between the driveways of their homes. There is no landscaping to obscure it, they said.

"We don't believe appropriate consideration was given to the location of this site," Bernstein told council members. "It was the most convenient, it was the most open and we appear to be stuck with it."

Paul Albritton, an attorney for AT&T, said other sites were evaluated but rejected for various aesthetic or technical reasons.

Advertisement

"We tried to select poles that were between property lines so that they weren't right in front of somebody's house," Albritton told council members. "They're in front of their garage or in front of their driveway. And that's the aesthetic benefit this particular pole has."

Bernstein, Schwachter and Stepanov said they did not become aware of the project until crews arrived to install the equipment. However, Lindsay Hagan, an associate planner, said two notices were mailed to households within 300 feet of the site before the project was approved.

"The city said that a notice was mailed," Bernstein said. "I take in the mail everyday and I don't recall ever seeing that notice. So, the day it went up was the first day we were aware of it."

The residents got a second chance when AT&T returned to the city for a modification to its permit for the project earlier this year.

The company initially agreed to install utility meters for the systems at least 9 feet above grade; however, PG&E, which owns the pole at Jardin Drive, does not allow meters to be placed that high. A zoning administrator subsequently approved a new minimum height of 7 feet.

Schwachter urged the council not to pass up the opportunity to prevent AT&T from proceeding with the project and potentially installing even uglier and noisier equipment in the future.

"We are not asking the city to keep AT&T away," he said. "We're suggesting that their choice of our site was inappropriate and that this is the last chance the city has to remedy this."

The system on Jardin Drive has only been partially installed. The residents said they are worried a battery backup will produce aggravating noise once the installation is completed.

"We just want to remind the city that the sound they're talking about is equivalent to operating a dishwasher or a running refrigerator, and it's constant," Schwachter said. "Although it may be not in violation of the code, it certainly should have been a consideration in picking a site."

The residents are also worried that the lower height will make it easier for pranksters to switch off power to the system. Albritton said it is standard practice to leave the switches unlocked.

"It would be very difficult for someone without some kind of short stepladder to get up to the switch," he said. "It just is not really an attractive nuisance. It's not something that people run around and do."

In voting 5-1 to uphold the zoning administrator's decision to lower the minimum height for the utility meters, council members expressed dismay that a better solution wasn't apparent. Councilman Mike Kasperzak did not participate because he owns property within 500 feet of the contested site.

"They have a right to improve their service and their coverage, and it looks like we've evaluated the alternative sites," Mayor Chris Clark said about AT&T. "They aren't necessarily better."

"I wish I could think of a better solution, but I can't," added Councilwoman Ronit Bryant.

Councilman Jac Siegel, however, said he believed that the company could come up with one.

"I'm an engineer myself and I looked at it extensively. You can do better than that aesthetically and probably from a design standpoint," Siegel told Albritton. "I think we need to hold you to a higher standard in our community."

Stepanov told The Daily News she was disappointed by the council's decision.

"I think their votes would have been different had this equipment been in their front yard," she said.